Any of you guys ever read the "Roving Brewer" articles by Eric Watson on the Beer Tools website?He has some pretty different views on hopping as well as yeast. I'd be interested in your comments about what he writes on both issues, but for this thread at least about hopping. He sez never FWH. Whadya think?

Well, he says FWH is detrimental to head retention, but he doesn't explain why that would be. And I haven't found that to be the case in my beers.

The great thing about brewing: There's no "wrong" way to do it.The awful thing about brewing: There's no "wrong" way to do it.

Do people use 30min additions to make good beer? Sure. There are lots of ways to make good beer. Is the beer good because of the 30min hop addition? I doubt it. In a blind tasting between a beer with a 30min and a 20min hop addition, all other things equal, I doubt most people could tell the difference.

I think you should pick a method that works for you and stick to it so you can get consistent results.

The great thing about brewing: There's no "wrong" way to do it.The awful thing about brewing: There's no "wrong" way to do it.

Do people use 30min additions to make good beer? Sure. There are lots of ways to make good beer. Is the beer good because of the 30min hop addition? I doubt it. In a blind tasting between a beer with a 30min and a 20min hop addition, all other things equal, I doubt most people could tell the difference.

I think you should pick a method that works for you and stick to it so you can get consistent results.

I agree with this.

Then there are the ones that say that 30 is bad because you don't get much bitterness, then sing the praises of all additions 20 min on. I know you get more flavor, but the utilization is even less.

I have been doin my Cream Ale with no hops in the boil. All go in at flameout with a long whirlpool. Of course I am doing it wrong and there should be no bitterness acording to some.

Logged

Jeff RankertAnn Arbor Brewers GuildAHA Governing Committee BJCP NationalHome-brewing, not just a hobby, it is a lifestyle!

Depends on the beer, and what you are trying to do. 30 Minute additions are said to give the most glycoside development from the polyphenols. These aid mouthfell and flavor. The bitterness utilization is still fairly high, and the flavor is said to still be there.

That is pretty interesting.

Logged

Delmarva United Homebrewers - President by inverse coup - former president ousted himself.AHA Member since 2006BJCP Certified: B0958

Any of you guys ever read the "Roving Brewer" articles by Eric Watson on the Beer Tools website?He has some pretty different views on hopping as well as yeast. I'd be interested in your comments about what he writes on both issues, but for this thread at least about hopping. He sez never FWH. Whadya think?

I just read some of it. He definately has some good and/or different ideas about yeast. Haven't found anything on hops yet.

Any of you guys ever read the "Roving Brewer" articles by Eric Watson on the Beer Tools website?He has some pretty different views on hopping as well as yeast. I'd be interested in your comments about what he writes on both issues, but for this thread at least about hopping. He sez never FWH. Whadya think?

Well, he says FWH is detrimental to head retention, but he doesn't explain why that would be. And I haven't found that to be the case in my beers.

When I read his articles I am really taking everything with a grain of salt. He seems to be coming from the standpoint of trying to translate what German breweries are doing in their production and applying it to homebrew scales. I don't think that Weihenstephan's experience with FWH necessarily applies to my APA's.

I take advice that has been extrapolated from the practice of large breweries with a grain of salt, because things just don't always scale to homebrew practice well. We have a lot more freedom because our primary endpoint is almost solely quality-focused, rather than economic.

We have a lot more freedom because our primary endpoint is almost solely quality-focused, rather than economic.

I'd say the endpoint of homebrewing is "enjoyment" rather than quality. "Expectation effects" have a huge impact on perceived enjoyment. If you FWH and you're convinced it makes your beer better, you will perceive beers you FWH to be better. We all want to be right and we want to confirm our biases. Since beer is so subjective and we're so invested in the beer we make, it's really easy to enjoy the beer we make. This is why no one makes "bad" homebrew.

I really like that guy's articles and I agree with most of what he says. FWH doesn't make a tremendous difference in quality (if any) but it does require hops, which cost money. Even if FWH does make a slightly better beer, on an industrial scale it'd be better to omit and save the money.

The great thing about brewing: There's no "wrong" way to do it.The awful thing about brewing: There's no "wrong" way to do it.

Do people use 30min additions to make good beer? Sure. There are lots of ways to make good beer. Is the beer good because of the 30min hop addition? I doubt it. In a blind tasting between a beer with a 30min and a 20min hop addition, all other things equal, I doubt most people could tell the difference.

I think you should pick a method that works for you and stick to it so you can get consistent results.

+1 here. The only thing I would add is the 30 minute hop addition makes it different than the 20 minute, 10 minute, whirlpool, etc.. How do you know whether you like it or not until you try it? Brew the same APA with a 30 minute instead of a 10 minute addition and compare them side by side. That's the great part of this hobby for me, the experimentation.

We have a lot more freedom because our primary endpoint is almost solely quality-focused, rather than economic.

I'd say the endpoint of homebrewing is "enjoyment" rather than quality. "Expectation effects" have a huge impact on perceived enjoyment. If you FWH and you're convinced it makes your beer better, you will perceive beers you FWH to be better. We all want to be right and we want to confirm our biases. Since beer is so subjective and we're so invested in the beer we make, it's really easy to enjoy the beer we make. This is why no one makes "bad" homebrew.

I really like that guy's articles and I agree with most of what he says. FWH doesn't make a tremendous difference in quality (if any) but it does require hops, which cost money. Even if FWH does make a slightly better beer, on an industrial scale it'd be better to omit and save the money.

Any of you guys ever read the "Roving Brewer" articles by Eric Watson on the Beer Tools website?He has some pretty different views on hopping as well as yeast. I'd be interested in your comments about what he writes on both issues, but for this thread at least about hopping. He sez never FWH. Whadya think?

Well, he says FWH is detrimental to head retention, but he doesn't explain why that would be. And I haven't found that to be the case in my beers.

I think you've just saved me time it would take to read the rest of his stuff.